| Author |
Message |
Rod Speed
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
brady4747 <jessebrady@gmail.com> wrote
| Quote: | So you just want to disagree with everything I just said, eh :)
|
Nope.
| Quote: | Main problem with the P2 is that it may not be very convenient
to have a decent amount of memory in that system, particularly
if you want to run the same OS you run on the PCs for simplicity.
Since the OP was contemplating just an enclosure, it seems
that running a gui on his network storage box is not a big priority
for him, thus as most any mobo supporting a P2 will likely to
be able to support at least 128M ram, he should be more
than fine with that amount of memory for running a file server
|
Pity that its obviously going to be a lot easier
if it can run the OS he is already familiar with.
| Quote: | There are several ready made linux installs that can whip it right
up for you, or get a debian netinst cd, use it, log in and type
'apt-get install openssh samba webmin' and you will be good to go :)
Not necessarily, particularly if you've never bothered
with other than the OS that runs on the PCs.
Again, in the context of the OP, he states having a mixed network at
home of Linux and WinXP. Seems he should be able to handle a little
web based configuration of samba with webmin, no? He has obviously
set up a network and wifi as well, so give the dude a little credit :)
|
It aint just about the OP and his capabilitys.
| Quote: | Oh, and put another smaller drive in besides your 300 gigger for the
OS so if you want to move it or switch os or something, no problem.
Makes more sense to use a small part of the main drive for that.
I guess this could be debated endlessly,
|
Nope.
| Quote: | so I will just say that it is my preference to
have OS on separate drive on my file servers,
|
More fool you.
| Quote: | even to the point of mounting some portions
read only or using flash devices for OS portion.
|
More fool you in spades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
brady4747
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
If you go the linux pc fileserver route, I beleive the package you will
want is called smartmontools. I think there is even a webmin module for
SMART, too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brady4747
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
Yes a p2 is fine and will give you much more performance than the
simple processors in some of the network storage thingies out nowadays.
There are several ready made linux installs that can whip it right up
for you, or get a debian netinst cd, use it, log in and type 'apt-get
install openssh samba webmin' and you will be good to go :) Oh, and put
another smaller drive in besides your 300 gigger for the OS so if you
want to move it or switch os or something, no problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curious George
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 18:03:53 +0100, "Folkert Rienstra"
<see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
| Quote: | "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:do97cl014nc@enews1.newsguy.com
"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:43a7bd04$0$47655$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
...and you can't easily monitor drive temperatures, as SMART doesn't
work on external drives...
No? Why not?
Did you hurt your brain today, Folknuts?
You obviously did. It's a valid question.
If he can't answer it, let see if you can.
|
Whoa. Déjà Vu! - complete with Folkert & Arno:
http://tinyurl.com/delsh
Only this time David isn't here for the answer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rod Speed
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
brady4747 <jessebrady@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Yes a p2 is fine and will give you much more
performance than the simple processors in some
of the network storage thingies out nowadays.
|
Main problem with the P2 is that it may not be very convenient
to have a decent mount of memory in that system, particularly
if you want to run the same OS you run on the PCs for simplicity.
| Quote: | There are several ready made linux installs that can whip it right
up for you, or get a debian netinst cd, use it, log in and type
'apt-get install openssh samba webmin' and you will be good to go :)
|
Not necessarily, particularly if you've never bothered
with other than the OS that runs on the PCs.
| Quote: | Oh, and put another smaller drive in besides your 300 gigger for the
OS so if you want to move it or switch os or something, no problem.
|
Makes more sense to use a small part of the main drive for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brady4747
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
So you just want to disagree with everything I just said, eh :)
| Quote: | Main problem with the P2 is that it may not be very convenient
to have a decent mount of memory in that system, particularly
if you want to run the same OS you run on the PCs for simplicity.
|
Since the OP was contemplating just an enclosure, it seems that running
a gui on his network storage box is not a big priority for him, thus as
most any mobo supporting a P2 will likely to be able to support at
least 128M ram, he should be more than fine with that amount of memory
for running a file server
| Quote: | Not necessarily, particularly if you've never bothered
with other than the OS that runs on the PCs.
|
Again, in the context of the OP, he states having a mixed network at
home of Linux and WinXP. Seems he should be able to handle a little web
based configuration of samba with webmin, no? He has obviously set up a
network and wifi as well, so give the dude a little credit :)
| Quote: | Makes more sense to use a small part of the main drive for that.
I guess this could be debated endlessly, so I will just say that it is |
my preference to have OS on separate drive on my file servers, even to
the point of mounting some portions read only or using flash devices
for OS portion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CJT
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
Rod Speed wrote:
| Quote: | brady4747 <jessebrady@gmail.com> wrote
So you just want to disagree with everything I just said, eh :)
Nope.
Main problem with the P2 is that it may not be very convenient
to have a decent amount of memory in that system, particularly
if you want to run the same OS you run on the PCs for simplicity.
Since the OP was contemplating just an enclosure, it seems
that running a gui on his network storage box is not a big priority
for him, thus as most any mobo supporting a P2 will likely to
be able to support at least 128M ram, he should be more
than fine with that amount of memory for running a file server
Pity that its obviously going to be a lot easier
if it can run the OS he is already familiar with.
.... which in the case of the OP allows for several choices. |
| Quote: |
There are several ready made linux installs that can whip it right
up for you, or get a debian netinst cd, use it, log in and type
'apt-get install openssh samba webmin' and you will be good to go :)
Not necessarily, particularly if you've never bothered
with other than the OS that runs on the PCs.
Again, in the context of the OP, he states having a mixed network at
home of Linux and WinXP. Seems he should be able to handle a little
web based configuration of samba with webmin, no? He has obviously
set up a network and wifi as well, so give the dude a little credit :)
It aint just about the OP and his capabilitys.
Oh, and put another smaller drive in besides your 300 gigger for the
OS so if you want to move it or switch os or something, no problem.
Makes more sense to use a small part of the main drive for that.
I guess this could be debated endlessly,
Nope.
so I will just say that it is my preference to
have OS on separate drive on my file servers,
More fool you.
even to the point of mounting some portions
read only or using flash devices for OS portion.
More fool you in spades.
|
Huh? I think it's pretty much accepted practice to put the OS on
a separate drive. Why would you think that's foolish? It seems
to me like the obvious thing to do, and for multiple reasons (e.g. it
allows easier swapping of drives between hardware, the use of different
levels of RAID for the OS from that used on the user data, cleaner
backup strategies, improved ability to judiciously use read-only mounts,
better head movement statistics, etc.).
Other than a small additional cost, I can't think of any reasons NOT to
do it that way.
--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rod Speed
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 22, 2005 12:15 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> wrote
| Quote: | Rod Speed wrote
brady4747 <jessebrady@gmail.com> wrote
So you just want to disagree with everything I just said, eh :)
Nope.
Main problem with the P2 is that it may not be very convenient
to have a decent amount of memory in that system, particularly
if you want to run the same OS you run on the PCs for simplicity.
Since the OP was contemplating just an enclosure, it seems
that running a gui on his network storage box is not a big priority
for him, thus as most any mobo supporting a P2 will likely to
be able to support at least 128M ram, he should be more
than fine with that amount of memory for running a file server
Pity that its obviously going to be a lot easier
if it can run the OS he is already familiar with.
... which in the case of the OP allows for several choices.
There are several ready made linux installs that can whip it right
up for you, or get a debian netinst cd, use it, log in and type
'apt-get install openssh samba webmin' and you will be good to go
:)
Not necessarily, particularly if you've never bothered
with other than the OS that runs on the PCs.
Again, in the context of the OP, he states having a mixed network at
home of Linux and WinXP. Seems he should be able to handle a little
web based configuration of samba with webmin, no? He has obviously
set up a network and wifi as well, so give the dude a little credit :)
It aint just about the OP and his capabilitys.
Oh, and put another smaller drive in besides your 300 gigger for
the OS so if you want to move it or switch os or something, no problem.
Makes more sense to use a small part of the main drive for that.
I guess this could be debated endlessly,
Nope.
so I will just say that it is my preference to
have OS on separate drive on my file servers,
More fool you.
even to the point of mounting some portions
read only or using flash devices for OS portion.
More fool you in spades.
Huh? I think it's pretty much accepted practice to put the OS on a separate
drive.
|
No it isnt. In spades with using a flash device.
| Quote: | Why would you think that's foolish?
|
Waste of time with modern systems. The OS is only loaded
of the HD at boot time with a system which has enough physical
ram and so there is no point in having a separate drive for it.
No point whatever in a read only or flash drive.
| Quote: | It seems to me like the obvious thing to do,
|
Nope.
| Quote: | and for multiple reasons (e.g. it allows easier swapping of drives between
hardware,
|
Thats marginal, not worth the farting around for that IMO.
| Quote: | the use of different levels of RAID for the OS from that used on the user
data,
|
What is the point ? Makes a lot more sense to ensure that its got enough
physical ram so you dont need a different RAID for the OS instead.
| Quote: | cleaner backup strategies,
|
Wrong. You can do that fine with a separate
partition instead of a separate physical drive.
| Quote: | improved ability to judiciously use read-only mounts,
|
You can do that fine without a separate physical drive
and its basically a waste of time with a decent OS anyway.
| Quote: | better head movement statistics, etc.).
|
Wrong. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to
ensure that its got enough physical ram instead.
| Quote: | Other than a small additional cost, I can't think of any reasons NOT to do it
that way.
|
That smaller drive will normally have worse performance
than the larger drive, its not as easy to ensure that the
drives have adequate cooling in the smaller cases that
dont have enough 3.5" drive bay slots to allow a free
slot between drives, drives that are small enough for
even something like XP 2003 server are so old and
dinosaury that their performance is obscene, you limit
the number of big drives you can install without farting
around with addon controllers, etc etc etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Folkert Rienstra
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
"Curious George" <cg@email.net> wrote in message news:p4shq1hf9k41mvc39ddcsmorivntvtb1nr@4ax.com
| Quote: | On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 18:03:53 +0100, "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
"Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:do97cl014nc@enews1.newsguy.com
"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:43a7bd04$0$47655$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
...and you can't easily monitor drive temperatures, as SMART doesn't
work on external drives...
No? Why not?
Did you hurt your brain today, Folknuts?
You obviously did. It's a valid question.
If he can't answer it, let see if you can.
Whoa. Déjà Vu! - complete with Folkert & Arno:
|
Aren't you forgetting the other one?
| Quote: | http://tinyurl.com/delsh
Only this time David isn't here for the answer.
|
Who in his usual bright way started with disagreeing with
Arnie but in his explanation then actually agreed with him.
David Lethe is not exactly one of the s.m.a.r.t.est persons.
And he did say "many" are too simple to support SMART,
not that it is impossible, as in:
" SMART doesn't work on external drives..."
Personally, I think Arnie hit the nail on the head,
with David just supporting what Arnie said.
Eric is just plain wrong as there are other commands in ATA
that also have no direct equivalents in SCSI either but are
likely emulated in SCSI, s.a. Inquiry and Read Capacity.
He is correct in that there is no 1:1 SMART equivalent.
There is a Subclass code 06h called SCSI transparent command
set that might be used to transport mode_sense/mode_select
commands as used with SCSI SMART. But as David said the
"dongle" has to do full SCSI emulation for that to work.
(Btw, according to one site that set is used by most all bridges).
Another way would be a proprietary driver on top of the USB
driver that just passes through IDE commands to the bridge
chip (similar as the SMART driver does with standard IDE)
which the bridge then would have to understand to pass this
through to the IDE device without conversion.
This would be along Arnies lines of ideas.
I think
http://www.freescale.com/files/microcontrollers/doc/ref_manual/DRM062.pdf
"Chapter 8 ATA/ATAPI Driver" may refer to such a proprietary driver.
Curious's Déjà Vu: (quoted)
David A.Lethe wrote:
| Quote: | On 20 Aug 2005 23:33:45 GMT, Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:
Previously Discordia <goaway@you.net> wrote:
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 19:57:25 -0700, "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote:
Nope, it is almost impossible.
USB uses SCSI commands, which don't have IDE SMART features.
"Jeff Korn" <under@lycos.co.uk> wrote in message news:42ee9c4d$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net...
I have seen some tools which inform me about the SMART data/status of internal IDE hard discs.
Unfortunately these tools do not offer the same for external USB harddiscs (connected through USB 2.0).
Is this possible at all?
I was about to ask this same question. So, if SMART won't work on an
external drive, will the manufactures drive test programs do as good a
job as SMART in determining the health of the drive?
Today many of these just read the SMART status. That means they will
likely not work on external drives unless the USB interface was
made by the same manufactuere and they put in some vendor-specific
extensions that allow SMART pass-through.
Best option IMO: Remove the external drive from its case and connect it
internally to read smart status.
Arno
No that is not the case. The reason that the USB hard disks don't
"support SMART" is because many of the USB dongle chips have very poor
protocol conversion & drivers that don't translate the full instruction set.
From the software perspective, a USB device makes the disk speak
"SCSI" instead of "ATA" instruction set, and their emulation is only
good enough to satisfy using the disk as a storage device, not to
support the type of diagnostic commands required to obtain and control
SMART. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
max
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:36 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
On 19 Dec 2005 10:34:42 -0800, kebuchan@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | I am also contemplating wifi or not, moving data (5mp pictures etc.)
round could be really slow when going wireless even if it's 54Mbps.
Would appreciate any feedback on brands/models etc that anyone has
experience with. I have a new 300G Maxtor IDE that I could put into
whatever new enclosure I buy for starters.
|
If you just want a simple, standalone network HD, Iomega makes some
that are a good choice for the money. I've had a couple of them
running for a while now on a WinXP network with no major issues.
One's a 250G Iomega 100D with wireless, the other's a 160G Network HD.
The Network HD is simpler and slower, and the 100D is more
configurable and faster. I disabled the wireless on the 100D because
it's too slow for what I'm using it for and it only has WEP security,
so both are connected to a network switch.
The main problem I've had with them is they don't power back up after
a power outage and you have to go turn them back on. Both are fan
cooled; the 100D enclosure is rather big and noisier. My Network HD
isn't USB expandable, but the newer ones are, as is the 100D.
Iomega sometimes has them on their factory outlet (but I don't see
them there right now), and they sometimes sell refurbished ones on
ebay as well.
http://www.iomega.com/direct/outlet/landing.jsp
max |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Redrobe
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:16 am Post subject:
Re: Network storage for home network (wifi or not?) |
|
|
Folkert Rienstra wrote:
| Quote: | And he did say "many" are too simple to support SMART,
not that it is impossible, as in:
" SMART doesn't work on external drives..."
|
...which states it doesn't /currently/ work, not that it never will.
That's the situation for usb/firewire external drives /at present/.
Can you read SMART info from an external drive *today*?
No.
Many of the external network drives use linux, so as someone
said, it might be currently possible to query SMART directly
on the unit for those.
--
Mike |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in